Our local indie bookstore is definitely missing out by not using social media. I went to a book signing there this past Saturday because the author had sent out a Tweet that he was there. While there, I asked for a schedule of upcoming author events. They said they didn't have one and that they advertise in Friday's paper. I had been out of town the last 2 weekends, so hadn't seen the paper the last 2 Fridays. I would have missed that event if the author hadn't used social media.

I agree that the internet is a necessary and crucial social networking tool. But when its used for mass proliferation (i.e. a lit group in Kentucky sends me an invite for a reading in Bowling Green) it's just absurd. Balance is always useful, that's why I think if people learned how to use their facebook invite sections responsibly, they'd have better success at getting (and keeping) my attention.

Thanks, Nancy!

This report is astonishing and depressing.

If independent bookstores are going to survive at all, they need to be on social networks "hand-selling." Facebook, twitter, etc. are about building virtual communities and work best when they rise from "real life" communities (e.g., the local fans of a particular bookseller or author). Same goes for publishers.

I attended Book Expo in NY earlier this past month, and the only hope people saw in that fairly gloomy environment was based around the power of social media to bring together those who care about books. Publishers, especially niche and indies, are really taking advantage of these tools to *grow* their businesses.

Frankly, the only reason to incur the additional expense and inconvenience of buying a book from an independent bookseller is to engage in a community institution. Social media only enhance that experience.

People who love books, our literary heritage, and all the riches of print culture MUST use these new tools to sustain (and hopefully grow) the community of like-minded people.

Even on the ephemeral, ultra-abbreviated twitter platform, there is a thriving community of book lovers.
To blindly dismiss social media as so much mindless chatter is worse than missing an opportunity, it is suicidal.

Don't forget Goodreads.com. I keep up with friends there about books I like, have read, or plan to read. It's better than keeping a handwritten book journal because it imports all the bibliographic data and images for you and keeps your own data organized. Also you can read what others have had to say about the books you are reading.

Good point, Nicole! I didn't even mention the likes of goodreads, shelfari or bookarmy.com. Thanks!

When you are actually writing a book you need a certain measure of solitude. Constant noise through social networking is not conducive to tapping into your own creativity.

Authors need to suspend chatter and other distractions to concentrate on their objectives. While literary people can be dismissed as elitist and antiquated for not using the Internet to stay in touch with their audience, staying in touch can be tiresome to those who simply want to write.

And what about privacy, its constant erosion, the intrusion of so many inquisitive tentacles wherever one runs to hide? The Internet as a two way street squelches an author's desire to observe without being observed.

For readers to insist they have to know an author to buy his books is impertinent. All our talk shows and chat forums try to crystallize the mystery of the creative process into words.

Questions such as, "How do you do it?" "Why do you do it?" and "What exactly did you mean when you wrote this?" are answered patiently by authors who had rather be doing something else because they see no other way to sell their works.

Writers of long ago were lucky. They could hear the sound of their own voices away from the knocks of so many strangers at their doors and they could still sell books and be known for what they did.

Anonymous writer: By all means, do your own thing, though you can certainly control the extent to which you interact with people (through social media or the postal service or in person). You don't have to live in a fishbowl to take advantage of new/social media.

On the other hand, if you want more people (impertinent or not) to buy or read your work, it is in your interest to join the conversation, do interviews, signings, lectures, and even blog posts.

These days, short of pulling a full Salinger, it is necessary to spend some time (virtually or physically) in the company of people you expect to buy your work.

Andrew, I totally agree with your comments.

I've been selling more books since I heeded the advice of a local librarian: "Writers should spend less time with other writers and more time with READERS." I'm not great at social networking, but I'm learning. And these days there's a lot of stuff online that I'm learning from. In case anyone is interested, I recommend these links:

David Meerman Scott's website (several free ebooks):
http://www.davidmeermanscott.com/products_ebooks.htm

Steve Chazin's MarketingApple ebook (also free):
http://www.marketingapple.com/marketing_apple/the-marketingapple-ebook.html

I'm working up the energy to join Facebook, but I just found out that there's already a Gail Farrelly there. Uh-oh. And she's younger and seems to have a much more exciting life than me. Hmmm. I think I have to develop a whole new persona, including a name change.

I'll have to respectfully disagree with your take on our discussion about the Internet, Nancy.

There was definitely a healthy respect for the Internet in the room and an acknowledgement that it was the most efficient way to reach most populations, but everyone was also giving equal importance to other methods of disseminating information. These may not be the most effective or convenient, but if the literary arts community is going to be successful, organizations have to be open to all means of outreach, especially to aging populations who are more comfortable with tradtional forms of communication, and those who can't afford a computer or Internet connection. Telling them to just go to the library or take a class are not, for many, viable solutions.

The literary arts summit meetings are intended to encourage mutual support and collaboration of the organizations within it, as well as their support of their needs and the means of outreach, communication, and programming that work best for them and for their constituents. It is not intended to judge or challenge the methods or preferences of the groups.

Rather, we hope what comes out of the summit is a stronger support and growth of the wonderfully varied diversity of both the organizations and their communities in Baltimore.

Nancy, thanks for calling people's attention to the Baltimore Metro Literary Arts Summit, which as you noted is just getting off the ground. I was privileged to represent the Baltimore Chapter of the Maryland Writers' Association at the summit.

Your point about the vital necessity of outreach is well taken, but your statement that the participants reacted with "almost complete dismissal" to social media and the Internet is, I think, an exaggeration. I didn't hear anyone dismiss the power of outreach in any form. I think it would be more accurate to say that we all reach out to our audiences in many different ways and we all, naturally, want to do better.

There's no one-size-fits-all solution for this group. The summit participants represent a wide range of non-profit and for-profit models serving an equally broad range of constituencies of all levels of age, interest, skill, and income. Some of us are solo operations with no budgets, others are commercial enterprises, and others receive state funding that enable them to provide staffs and offices. Most of the rest of us fall somewhere in between.

What's exciting about the summit is that we are coming together to share our resources, ideas, and experiences for what works and what doesn't, and we are in a position to help promote each other's activities. That includes using social media, blogs, discussion lists, websites, and of course resources like Read Street as well as print and broadcast media.

The Baltimore Metro Literary Arts Summit is not a bunch of hand-wringing technophobes. We're just like readers and writers everywhere, trying to figure out the best ways to bring together people who innovate and celebrate the literary arts. And I think we're off to a very promising start. Baltimore will be hearing a lot more from us in the coming months -- even through social media.

Hi Nancy,

>

I have to echo the sentiments expressed here that your post's headline and the excerpt above do not reflect the conversation held at the Baltimore Literary Summit. On the contrary, every organization represented at the summit exists and indeed thrives exactly because of the Internet and related technologies. Some attendees expressed concern about communicating with constituents who--for economic or technological reasons--do not have access to the Internet or possess e-mail addresses. The issue is less about a "pages vs. pixels" philosophical debate, but how to strategically, effectively, and efficiently use social networks. Furthermore, it is about how those of us in the literary arts community can share resources and create synergy in dire economic times to raise public awareness of the LITERARY arts among the other creative arts. That involves a whole toolbox of strategies in which the Internet is one very important tool.